Buoyed by a massive win at the voting booths this week, supporters of a plan to open a slot parlor at Raynham Park say the margin of victory should send a clear message to the state panel that awards gambling licenses. “Chairman Crosby has said on multiple occasions that he’s looking for a ...

Buoyed by a massive win at the voting booths this week, supporters of a plan to open a slot parlor at Raynham Park say the margin of victory should send a clear message to the state panel that awards gambling licenses.

Raynham Park, in partnership with Pennsylvania-based Greenwood Racing, is one of four applicants still in contention for the one slot-parlor license the Gaming Commission will award in the state. On Tuesday, Raynham became the first potential host community to pass a referendum supporting a slot-parlor proposal. The ballot question won 1,822-290, carrying more than 86 percent of the votes cast.

“The level of community support is a factor among many other requirements that the commission will consider when reviewing final applications,” Gaming Commission spokeswoman Elaine Driscoll said in an email.

Other factors in the licensing decision will include the potential for economic development, the building and site design, mitigation of impacts, financial projections and the ability to generate revenue.

“We think it (local support) will be an important factor, and we’re extremely proud to have support from the residents of Raynham,” project spokesman Conor Yunits said.

“It’s a very strong testament to the strong standing between Raynham Park and the people of Raynham,” he added, describing the decades-long history of the former dog track. “Three other applicants are talking about bringing gaming to a community for the first time.”

Raynham Park is competing for the slot license against Rush Street Gaming, which has a proposed site in Millbury; Cordish Co., which hopes to build in Leominster; and Penn National Gaming, which has pitched a slot parlor in Tewksbury. Each of the other three applicants has inked a host community agreement and has local votes scheduled in September.

Another applicant, Plainridge Racecourse, was eliminated from contention earlier this month after a Gaming Commission review unearthed alleged misdeeds, including reports that former Plainridge CEO Gary Piontkowski routinely grabbed cash from the harness track’s money room.

While the Raynham slot question carried each precinct handily on Tuesday, more than half of its opposition came from the voters who live closest to the proposed site. The question carried Precinct 2 by a vote of 543-149.

“That’s still huge,” Pacheco said. “You’re always going to have some people vote no. I always expected north Raynham’s turnout would be bigger.”

Yunits and Pacheco each said they were confident that the host community agreement will sufficiently address any concerns associated with the proposed facility.

Page 2 of 2 -
“I think, moving forward, Raynham’s job and the park’s job is to make sure that whatever happens, this is something that works for the town,” Pacheco said. “I always try to work to represent the whole town, and I take people’s concerns to heart. Our host community agreement demonstrates that.”

The host community agreement calls for the proposed Raynham slot parlor to pay $1.1 million to the town annually, an amount that would increase by 2.5 percent per year after the first three years of operation. It would hit a ceiling after the 20th year. Plans also call for traffic studies and infrastructure improvements.

The proponents say they are prepared to invest $220 million into the project, which would include a slot parlor, restaurants, retail space and an entertainment venue. Other potential amenities could include a hotel, bowling lanes and a cinema.